Submitted by pwilson@ncpdp.org on
NCPDP Comment
NCPDP recommends the adoption of taxonomy codes to identify the type of facility.
Physical place of available services or resources.
Data Element |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Facility Type
Description (*Please confirm or update this field for the new USCDI version*)
Category of service or resource available in a location. Examples include but are not limited to hospital, laboratory, pharmacy, ambulatory clinic, long-term and post-acute care facility, and food pantry. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Submitted by pwilson@ncpdp.org on
NCPDP recommends the adoption of taxonomy codes to identify the type of facility.
Submitted by yale-coredQMRoadmap on
CDC and CMS agree that facility type should move forward as part of USCDI V4. The facility type element complements existing USCDI data elements, particularly “encounter location”, and provides contextual information for surveillance, compliance, and public health action. For example, information on facility type can help facilitate work to improve health equity by supporting efforts to identify, characterize, and take steps to respond to evidence of decreased or restricted access to care, inadequate care quality, and adverse outcomes.
However, we also recognize that applicable standards for facility type vary in terms of granularity, maturity, breadth (examples include NUCC Healthcare Provider Taxonomy—Non-Individual; NHSN Facility Type; FHIR Location). To that end, we recommend that ONC also work with CDC, CMS, and other key healthcare and public health stakeholders to identify and evolve appropriate standards for Facility Type. Importantly, standards for facility type should be defined in ways that maintain clear differentiation from “encounter location” and associated standards.
Submitted by nedragarrett_CDC on
As noted above, CDC and CMS agree that facility type should move forward as part of USCDI V4. However, we also want to recognize that applicable standards for facility type vary in terms of granularity, maturity, breadth (examples include NUCC Healthcare Provider Taxonomy—Non-Individual; NHSN Facility Type; FHIR Location). To that end, we recommend that facility type move forward with commitment to continue development, maturation of applicable standards for Facility Type Be defined in ways that maintain clear differentiation from “encounter location” and associated standards.
Submitted by nedragarrett_CDC on
CSTE agrees with CDC's recommendation for this data element.
Submitted by nedragarrett_CDC on
CDC continues to recommend inclusion of this high priority data element in USCDI v4.
Submitted by nedragarrett_CDC on
Submitted by pwilson@ncpdp.org on
NCPDP Comments on USCDI draft v5
NCPDP recommends the adoption of the Taxonomy codes to identify the type of facility.